Captain Syrup > Waluigi - Full Analytical Article

Just to keep the discussion up, is there any reason Waluigi is actually necessary to be there beyond headcanons? As in, actual in-game reasons that tell ya he HAS to be included or else the game would be missing something? Because after getting into this whole idea I came to realize, we might as well just be used to it.

I mean, Diddy Kong followed the exact same line Syrup should have: DK had a partner in the shape of DK Jr., Diddy was made by team other than Nintendo... But he became so relevant as DK's partner that he became so in the Mario Spinoffs, even if he himself had never appeared in a Mario game before. Why don't people question that, but the idea of Syrup being there from the start feels SO strange to some people? because Waluigi has been there for 15 years filling up space, maybe?
 
Honestly by this point I'd go so far as to say that anyone who thinks Waluigi is a worthwhile character just doesn't care about Wario's legacy. It's shallow that people can admire such a character considering Wario's achievements in two great video game series, and have even the gall to state that someone with absolutely no worthwhile use in fifteen fucking years deserves to uphold partnership with Wario. It's an absolute joke. The point of this article was to express confusion about Syrup's absence, sure, but the other point in Waluigi being completely redundant is still a valid point and the evidence presented against it has been insufficient if not nonexistent.

Wario has two seperate unique casts with memorable and valid characters who've actually done something, and people are still willing to simplify that into a carbon copy of existing shit? It's utterly reprehensible. If you still think Waluigi is worth the time and the effort to animate, voice act, and make merchandise out of, then it's just a case of having really low standards.
 
Guys. I totally agree with you two on the legacy of Wario being much more important than Waluigi and everything. I know everything we've been playing for all this time is certainly better than he is. And I'm totally against Waluigi being used as a "representation" of the Wario series in crossover games, because he isn't.

But... I like Waluigi. In which way? As the Mario character he is: I like him just as I like most Mario characters, because I like the Mario series and it has a bunch of likable/funny/amusing dudes, Waluigi being one of them. That is all.
 
Dumribble said:
Guys. I totally agree with you two on the legacy of Wario being much more important than Waluigi and everything. I know everything we've been playing for all this time is certainly better than he is. And I'm totally against Waluigi being used as a "representation" of the Wario series in crossover games, because he isn't.

But... I like Waluigi. In which way? As the Mario character he is: I like him just as I like most Mario characters, because I like the Mario series and it has a bunch of likable/funny/amusing dudes, Waluigi being one of them. That is all.
Click to expand...
What is it you like about him?
 
I like how wacky and comical he is: he's a tall, skinny guy with those absurdly long legs, a silly-looking nose, and those eyelids that make it look like he's often tired/angry. And his wearing purple + being an annoying competitor reminds me of Dick Dastardly.
 
Dumribble said:
I like how wacky and comical he is: he's a tall, skinny guy with those absurdly long legs, a silly-looking nose, and those eyelids that make it look like he's often tired/angry. And his wearing purple + being an annoying competitor reminds me of Dick Dastardly.
Click to expand...
So, just his design?
 
waluigi looks funny, is amusing due to his crazy antics, and his animations etc. exudes personality even if his character isn't very developed. Liking Mario sports filler isn't serious bizness :V

BzNQo1e.png
 
It's possible to have serious debates about subjective, inane matters, but self-awareness is key. The more inane a subject matter is, the more posturing like "people are still willing to simplify that into a carbon copy of existing shit? It's utterly reprehensible." is going to incite eye-rolls. Because it's silly.


"I think he's funny", "he's amusing" and "I like Waluigi" may not be particularly deep reasoning, but they're no any less valid, because liking fictional characters is one of the most hopelessly subjective thing there is, and it's not important. Waluigi's prolungated existence does not have any moral, financial or health implication for any of us, it's simply the appearance of a fictional plumber in a series of childrens vidya. And people aren't going to stop liking this specific fictional plumber due to the ~legacy of Wario~, especially when the creators of said childrens videogames have repeadtly shown they give no fucks about the lores anyway: p.
 
Glowsquid said:
It's possible to have serious debates about subjective, inane matters, but self-awareness is key. The more inane a subject matter is, the more posturing like "people are still willing to simplify that into a carbon copy of existing shit? It's utterly reprehensible." is going to incite eye-rolls. Because it's silly.


"I think he's funny", "he's amusing" and "I like Waluigi" may not be particularly deep reasoning, but they're no any less valid, because liking fictional characters is one of the most hopelessly subjective thing there is, and it's not important. Waluigi's prolungated existence does not have any moral, financial or health implication for any of us, it's simply the appearance of a fictional plumber in a series of childrens vidya. And people aren't going to stop liking this specific fictional plumber due to the ~legacy of Wario~, especially when the creators of said childrens videogames have repeadtly shown they give no fucks about the lores anyway: p.
Click to expand...

We're on a forum dedicated to discussing Wario content, let's not act as if anything we talk about bears significance.

But as long as we are, what's the point in discussing anything if blind acceptance is alright? Yes, it is 'less valid'. An opinion without anything to back it up isn't worth anything. I'm not saying you can't like something without a reason, but for as long as you hold entertainment as an interest, you might as well have standards. There's objective proof that Waluigi isn't worth shit, and that's fifteen years of starring in nothing but spinoffs, and having a design that took no effort, and that he was easily replaceable with a character who had earned their place in the history of the hobby. Yet you can buy figurines and plush toys and Halloween costumes of Waluigi. Go figure.
 
You heard it guys: nobody is allowed to criticize a work of fiction because it ain't real. There is no people putting effort behind it and getting paid for it. A shitty fanfiction has the exact same value as a novel because everything is subjective. Arguments don't exist: feels are more important than actual reasoning.

...Seriously tho, it's about having standards. We're pointing out ways in which a game could be better taking into consideration various aspects that are actually relevant to a game and are just met with 'Oh I don't like it. Stop saying it 'cause it doesn't matter'.

What is wrong with genuinely caring about game and character design?
 
This: waluigi looks funny, is amusing due to his crazy antics, and his animations etc. exudes personality even if his character isn't very developed. Liking Mario sports filler isn't serious bizness :V.

I do prefer the more vast Wario legacy over Waluigi by far. I'm just amused and like Waluigi because I like Mario sports silliness. I appreciate something well constructed, but that doesn't keep me from also enjoying something small. It's like if you really like to sleep on a really fluffy cushion, but a standard one is not bad.
 
Melluh said:
You heard it guys: nobody is allowed to criticize a work of fiction because it ain't real. There is no people putting effort behind it and getting paid for it. A shitty fanfiction has the exact same value as a novel because everything is subjective. Arguments don't exist: feels are more important than actual reasoning.
Click to expand...

If you're going to accuse someone of playing appeal to feels, starting your post with a piddly strawman (itself a telltale sign of an emotionally-loaded response) is not the best way to go around it : p.


« It’s subjective » is a thought-terminating cliché used to shout down legitimate discourse, but it does hold truth in extreme cases. Like, let’s say I say “Lethal Skies is a great game because your plane has more realistic physics and you have limited missiles” and then another person in the conversation respond “I didn’t like Lethal Skies because your plane controls weird and having so little missiles is frustrating.”


I can engage the guy. I can respond to him that Lethal Skies limited missiles loadouts are not a flaw, but rather a deliberate design choices that add depth by requiring the player to adapt what they carry to the task at hand. I can also respond that the realistic physics allow for more intense and personal dogfights, and a much greater differentiation between player planes that in more traditional arcade flyers. I can also play the objectivity card and say that Lethal Skies offer more modes of gameplay and more customization options. I might make a more compelling case, and my opinion may appear more valid to disinterested readers that have not played Lethal Skies-engaging on that level is perfectly fine, and yes, it’s much more interesting than shrugging it off as “well opinions are subjective I guess”.


But the deal is, no matter how eloquent I am, there’s the very real possibility (and daresay, inevitability)that the other guy won’t change his opinion,and go “Well, I still don’t like Lethal Skies”. I can leave it there, and acknowledge the fact that the guy is perfectly in his right to not like Lethal Skies, because what make the pleasure nerves in your brain tick is (not entirely) bound to rationality, and in the end, it’s just a shitty flight game. Or I could go “Well, if you don’t like Lethal Skie, you might be, dare I say, a less discerning gamer, and you're responsible for the dearth of challenge flight combat games.” And that is being silly : p.
 
Nobody is saying anything against critizing Waluigi or fictional works in general, it's just when you go this strongly against people just for liking a character it just comes of as spiteful, according to you me liking Waluigi means that I actually don't give a fuck about Wario's legacy and that all of my anger geared towards Smash for how much it loves to piss all over it is just an empty lie that I have deluded myself into believing.

I would also argue against the idea that liking his design or thinking he is funny have less of an worth as far as opinions are concerned, in fact design and voice work are the first things we can usually take note of about any character and sometimes that's all you need in order to enjoy a character.
I actually have a bit of a story relating to that regarding the guy to the right of my ava, back when I first got his debut game imported from japan the only things I could make out about were his name (Sig), design and voice, I didn't know shit about his personality or backstory until sometime later when I looked up information about him on the internet, which helped to cement him as my favorite Puyo character, but even without that he still intruiged me because design and voice work go a long way to make a character more enjoable and for quite a few people Waluigi falls into a similar category because they find his lankyness and voice funny, which may not be a very deep reasoning, but I don't understand why "I like him because he entertains me" has no value when discussing a fictional character from a ENTERTAINMENT industry.

Mind you I actually agree with your points on Waluigi being objectivly uneeded and that Syrup could do everything he does with ease and I also get wanting to have standards for
videogame characters and such, especially as someone who sees vidya as a sencere form of art, but if you ask me the fact that people have grown to like Waluigi gives him plents of worth in my opinion.
 
Waluigi is a character that was optional for Nintendo and Camelot, they just created a Luigi clone with Wario's characteristics features because they simply ignored the Wario Land saga and lore. They wanted to created a match for Luigi like Wario was for Mario. (Individuals thinks it's a original concept but it's just full of baloney.)

For example, like ChanceTime & Melluh mentioned previously on their analysis on Tumblr about Birdo being Yoshi's partner, Birdo was a boss on Super Mario Bros. 2, and nowadays he/she becomed a recurring character on the Mario spinoffs, also being Yoshi's partner and nobody wasn't shocked about it that a boss and a good align character was together. Because it's totally logic.

They could use that idea for Captain Syrup being Wario's partner , since she was a recurrent boss on Wario Land and represent a evil conterpart of Peach. Peach being a princess and rules the Mushroom Kingdom on the right way and cares for her people while Syrup is a pirate that robs and she's ruthless and she only cares for her well being. If you say that Waluigi is better than Captain Syrup and yet has no backstories and reasons why he hates Luigi, then explain to me please.
 
Glowsquid said:
If you're going to accuse someone of playing appeal to feels, starting your post with a piddly strawman (itself a telltale sign of an emotionally-loaded response) is not the best way to go around it : p
Click to expand...

Oh thank you for pointing it out! I thought you were actually saying that this discussion wasn't worth it because liking fictional characters is not important and since it's so subjective an argument made based on personal perception is just as good as one based on actual reasoning.

What Warelander up there said is also very true, by the way: you CAN like a character based off a few traits off them. I personally love it when a game does that, like it allows you to fill in the gaps based on what's there, without you having to make em all up? it really enhances the experience for me. ...But the thing with Waluigi is that his 'unique' traits are all based off or made in relation to other characters. There is almost nothing to him, and whatever little there is serves absolutely no purpose.

Seriously tho, the fact we ain't gonna change people's opinions doesn't mean we don't have arguments to present or that we shouldn't be looking for a response. It's perfectly okay to like Waluigi, but it's also possible to do so and recognize there's not much to his character. What confuses us is why people DEFEND him even in light of this, like if he was necessary or like if what we were saying was so completely ridiculous, without a a single argument to back this up.

I insist, if Syrup was there from the beginning, NOBODY would suggest that an empty Wario/Luigi clone is the better choice. But somehow now the idea that Waluigi is not necessary makes people jump in defense of him by saying 'Oh, but I like him for reasons that can apply to any other character, so your argument is invalid because it's just your opinion'. Ignoring completely how many other characters could fill in the role better than him, they even go and say he should be given more attention like if 15 years of filler wasn't enough for a character with nothing to them. As Gizmoirr pointed out, we just wanna know WHY.
 
. But somehow now the idea that Waluigi is not necessary makes people jump in defense of him by saying 'Oh, but I like him for reasons that can apply to any other character, so your argument is invalid because it's just your opinion'.
Click to expand...

You'll find that most people who posted in this thread don't disagree with that at all, and that we're more taking issues with the tone of the bumping post. If you two are wanting a productive exchange, I don't think a statement like "If you still think Waluigi is worth the time and the effort to animate, voice act, and make merchandise out of, then it's just a case of having really low standards." is conductive to that goal.

Either way I'm glad you didn't take my somewhat mean-spirited retord to heart (or if you did, you're doing a reasonably good job at hiding it) : P.

----

this is way too many words written about waluigi, I'm out
 
Last edited:
Glowsquid said:
If you two are wanting a productive exchange, I don't think a statement like "If you still think Waluigi is worth the time and the effort to animate, voice act, and make merchandise out of, then it's just a case of having really low standards." is conductive to that goal.
Click to expand...

How? Waluigi is an inherently lazily-designed character. To admire that is to admire lackluster work, and to admire lackluster work is to lower your own standards. The tone of the bumping post is simply to get across that Waluigi doesn't have historical significance, nor quality or originality in design. We don't have an issue if anyone likes Waluigi, we're not here to make anyone feel ashamed or some shit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top